Reading mode: Light Dark

Which 400mm lens would you recommend

Go to last post
D

dwng

Active member
Messages
55
Reaction score
0
Location
Melbourne, AU
Wanting to get a flexible lens upto around 400mm. Here are the contenders:

1. Nikon 80-400mm F/4.5-5.6 VR is slow and VR doesn't actually compensate for motion blur of the subject. Also, I can't afford it... (; ;)

2. Sigma 80-400mm F/4.5-5.6 OS is supposedly faster (still not HSM) than the Nikon equivalent but much heavier, OS may give only 2 stops instead of 3 as per Nikon. Also not a fast lens but cheaper.

3. Sigma 70-200mm F/2.8 has limited range, but together with 2x teleconverter would make it 140-400mm. Very bright (without the converter) and would slow down to F/5.6 (2 stops) once teleconverter is attached. Price is about the same as Sigma 80-400mm OS. It is HSM and teleconverter still keeps the lens AF rather than MF (as it would in the case of 2). Together with converter will make this lens 23cm long and heavy...

4. Bigma 50-500mm F/4-6.3 is slow with great reach and apparently good optical performance despite it is a 10x zoom (is this true?). Cheapest of these 4 options.

It looks like the 3 option is the most optimum - fast if I only need 70-200mm and it can reach 400mm if I really need it. My questions are:

1. Does teleconverter degrade quality (sharpness, distortion, contract, colours, vignetting) significantly?

2. At 400mm F/5.6, this may be too slow thus not handheld-able but requires a tripod. Does this nullify the advantage of this setup and I should rather go with Bigma?

Anyone with experience with option 2 (70-200mm 2.8+2x converter)? Your advice is much appreciated. Thank you.

D.
 
Here is what I did and am very happy with it, It is fast focusing, Sharp. I got the Nikon 70-200 2.8 VR with the TC-17E II, Using the TC I get 340mm with no noticeable loss (With 1.5 factor I think it is around 510mm) Idid try the TC-20E and found that I did notice some loss and sold it.
--

Life is not a journey to the grave with the intention of arriving safely in a pretty and well preserved body, but rather to skid in broadside, thoroughly used up, totally worn out, and loudly proclaiming - ' Wow! What a ride!'

 
Yes, Nikon 70-200mm VR is a fantastic lens and with the 1.4x teleconverter setup, it is a sure winner if price is no question... I envy you. ^ ^

Please allow me to rephrase my questions a little about the 3rd option:

1. How much would the 2x teleconverter degrade the optical performance of 70-200mm lens?

2. Given that at 400mm, it would be F/5.6 hence slow, would I be better off going with VR/OS lens to make it more handheld-able. Otherwise, would Bigma be more worthwhile given that it is relatively cheap.

3. Can I attach lens with teleconverter from anther brand, say Nikon lens with Sigma teleconverter? If so, what do I lose? AF?
4. Can you suggest another combination or lens?

Thanks a lot for your help.
 
If you have the option, rent, borrow or purchase with exchange. You have not stated what you will be shooting with there fine long lenses. Depending on your style, VR might be a wonderful feature or not matter at all. For me it allows me the freedom I love to move quickly from place to place and compose. All of these lenses are heavy and you will need to get used to carrying them. I have the 80-400 VR and am very happy with it. Using the focus limiter eliminates the hunting that many complain about and makes it focus fast enough to capture birds in flight. I have not tried shooting sports with it and suspect that grab shots might be a challenge while anticipating the action would allow you to get fine photos.

Morris

--



http://qcpages.qc.edu/~morris/POD
 
dwng said:
1. How much would the 2x teleconverter degrade the optical
performance of 70-200mm lens?
Click to expand...
Some. Tests I've seen show it a little softer than the 80-400 VR.
dwng said:
2. Given that at 400mm, it would be F/5.6 hence slow, would I be
better off going with VR/OS lens to make it more handheld-able.
Otherwise, would Bigma be more worthwhile given that it is
relatively cheap.
Click to expand...
If you want to hand hold a long lens like this, VR is a wonderful thing. Otherwise you will be bumping up your ISO to keep your shutter speed above 1/500 or more. You might need 1/1000 for the Bigma.
dwng said:
3. Can I attach lens with teleconverter from anther brand, say
Nikon lens with Sigma teleconverter? If so, what do I lose? AF?
Click to expand...
Difrent combinations work difrently. Some maintain AF in good light even when out of spec.
dwng said:
4. Can you suggest another combination or lens?

Thanks a lot for your help.
Click to expand...
--



http://qcpages.qc.edu/~morris/POD
 
but would like to get a good lens as well...what are some of the costs on these lenses??? Im going to be taking zoo pics along with birds at the park and such...I want one that is going to reach out and grab ya and still give good clear quality pics
 
TTTexan said:
but would like to get a good lens as well...what are some of the
costs on these lenses??? Im going to be taking zoo pics along with
birds at the park and such...I want one that is going to reach out
and grab ya and still give good clear quality pics
Click to expand...
Reach out and grab ya, That sounds like a 70-200 2.8 VR to me @1,500 bucks US. If money is no prob it is a great zoo lens.



--

Life is not a journey to the grave with the intention of arriving safely in a pretty and well preserved body, but rather to skid in broadside, thoroughly used up, totally worn out, and loudly proclaiming - ' Wow! What a ride!'

 
Sigma 120-300/2.8 and 1.4x TC - fast focus, excellent quality. Monopod if possivle for your type of shooting.
--
Julia
 
On a 70-200 sigma f2.8 HSM(which I love and is very sharp and very fast) a 1.4x TC only adds one stop and takes you to a factored 420mm at F4 and this would be a much more useful all around lens than others. just a thought-----ron s.
--
seeing and being aware are not the same thing....
http://www.pbase.com/ron9ron
 
Julia,

I was told certain lens coatings will turn "milky" (or "foggy") after some years and the damage is irreversible. Some people speculate it has to do with heat and chemical interaction with the vapourized oil used in the aperture blades. And some people speculate Sigma is more proned to this problem.

I only owned an MF 18-35 Sigma very briefly and I haven't seen such problem in all my Nikkor lenses. Are you aware of this problem on Sigma lenses?
--
John
 
quick poll shows that none of my colleagues ever accounted Sigma "pro grade" going foggy.
--
Julia
 
dbvand said:
dbvand said:
Sigma 120-300/2.8 and 1.4x TC - fast focus, excellent quality.
Click to expand...
The 120-300 f2.8 is excellent by all accounts, but for $1,500 less
the Sigma 100-300 f4 and 1.4X TC wouldn't be too bad either.
Click to expand...
maybe the difference in price is slightly less, and difference in quality is bot so slightly little :)

Sigma 120-300mm f/2.8 EX DG APO IF HSM for Nikon AF $1,949.95
Sigma 100-300mm f/4 EX APO DG IF HSM for Nikon AF $809.95
Sigma 1.4x EX DG APO Tele-Converter for Nikon AF $154.95
Sigma 2x EX DG APO Tele-Converter for Nikon AF $182.95

Mack 3-Year Extended Warranty for Professional Lens valued from $1000 to $2000 --- $80

http://www.sigma4less.com

--
Julia
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top